The Palm Beach Post

New ‘Roseanne’ out of sync with show’s original premise

- By C. Nicole Mason C. Nicole Mason is the author of“Born Bright: A Young Girl’s Journey from Nothing to Something in America” and director of the Center for Research and Policy in the Public Interest. She wrote this for The Washington Post.

When “Roseanne” premiered in 1988, I was among the millions of Americans who tuned in weekly to watch the Conners navigate life in the Midwest. Although I was a kid in Los Angeles, thousands of miles from the fictional Lanford, Illinois, the show’s humorous, caustic portrayal of a working-class family struggling to make ends meet resonated with me. In the show, I saw my own family’s quest for the American dream and how, for many living in poverty, it’s often a dream deferred.

In one of my favorite episodes, Roseanne juggles paying the bills by intentiona­lly putting the wrong check in the wrong envelope and telling the utility company the bill never came. In another, Becky is embarrasse­d when she learns her mother has taken a job as a shampoo girl to provide for their family. I was Becky, not quite fully grasping that we were poor or that money was in short supply. This was the genius of Roseanne — it transcende­d race, class and political boundaries while appearing not to do so.

The “Roseanne” reboot, rather than working to bridge the class divide and understand­ing in America, attempts to insert itself into the current political moment by declaring Roseanne a Donald Trump supporter. After the premiere, Trump even called the real Roseanne to congratula­te her on the series reboot.

I feel alienated and slightly betrayed by the reboot. Roseanne’s support of Trump — whose Make America Great Again appeal turned out to be a lot more about racial anxiety among white voters than economic concerns — is out of sync with the show’s original premise.

“Roseanne” of the late 1980s and ’90s was deft at pointing an invisible, yet very real, finger at self-interested politician­s who failed towns such as Lanford. The enemy was the rigged system that kept families like the Conners from getting ahead, not other working-class families or immigrants. That message appealed to people across racial, ethnic and class lines. Making Roseanne a Trump supporter changes that.

Working-class people and families are more similar than they are different. According to the Center for American Progress, the working class (defined as people who are employed for wages, especially in manual or industrial work, with less than a four-year college degree) constitute 43 percent of all U.S. workers. Collective­ly, these workers are more likely to earn the federal minimum wage of $7.25 and rely on public benefits such as food stamps or Medicaid, compared with other groups of workers. Regardless of race, these workers are also the most affected when a corporatio­n moves its operations overseas, an industry disappears or a recession depresses the economy.

Economic angst caused by the shortage of good-paying, high-quality jobs with benefits for unskilled or undereduca­ted workers cuts across race and ethnicity. Working-class people and families have been crushed under the weight of stagnant wages and the rising costs of living in both rural and urban settings.

In the “Roseanne” reboot’s premiere, Roseanne laments the high cost of prescripti­on drugs, Becky considers surrogacy to turn a quick buck, and Darlene has moved back home and has a hard time finding a job — classic “Roseanne.” When we catch up with the Conners, things haven’t changed much, as with many working-class people. This is the reality and truth of poverty: Only a small fraction ever make it to the middle class, regardless of who is president, or one’s racial or ethnic background.

In truth, I can’t figure out if the reboot is an indictment of working-class whites, who overwhelmi­ngly voted for Trump and are getting very little in return, or if it is a nod to a growing narrative that attempts to define whites as the true working class in America at the expense of blacks and Latinos.

In this current political and social moment, there is an opportunit­y to build an economy that works for everyone, and to lift up the most economical­ly vulnerable and marginaliz­ed in society. The first step in doing so is recognizin­g where our realities intersect, not where they diverge. In explicitly making Roseanne a Trump supporter, the show is prioritizi­ng the politics that divide the working class over the thing that unites us: the fact that we have so little.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States